Colombia Pictures\’ summary of the cinematic train-wreck explains: \”Jack Sadelstein (Adam Sandler) is a successful advertising executive in Los Angeles with a beautiful wife (Katie Holmes) and kids, who dreads one event each year: the Thanksgiving visit of his identical twin sister Jill (also Adam Sandler). Jill\’s neediness and passive-aggressiveness is maddening to Jack, turning his normally tranquil life upside down.\”
Identical twins will by necessity be of the same sex. Different sex twins will be fraternal twins and don\’t need to look alike.
lol…I seem to recall that Eric Sykes and Hattie Jacques were identical twins…
Jack and Jill are both played by the same actor, so they are identical. It’s a joke
nope. identical twins can be different sexes under very specific circumstances –
http://9e.devbio.com/article.php?ch=8&id=111
Hollywood 1, Tim 0
An interesting review of “Jack and Jill” by filmmakers Mike Stoklasa and Jay Bauman. After seeing it, they come to the conclusion that Adam Sandler is committing fraud on a massive scale:
http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag/jack-and-jill/
I believe it could be explained by the following piece of doggerel…
Jack and Jill went up the hill
So Jack could see Jill’s fanny
Jack got a shock
And a mouthful of cock
Because Jill’s a pre-op tranny.
The late Peter Cook claimed to be an only twin….
It’s a little known fact that in America, a “Jack And Jill” is a kind of party in which women watch men masturbate.
Over here, we call it The Liberal Democrats.
Ian B: I’m going to have to call bullshit on that. The Liberal Democrats don’t have any men.
Ian B
You are guilty of the red wine spluttered over my keyboard.
@Ken, don’t see any possibility of having monozygotic twins identical in every respect except sex there (Gibert’s Developmental Biology takes me back a few years) – rather some obscure ways of having nonidentical monozygotic twins. They’d be as different in all characteristics (including sex) as normal siblings.
Incidentally, when hollywood mangles up science and technology (as it inevitably does) I find the extent to which I’m happy to overlook it is a good indication of how much I am enjoying the film.
I think the more important question for scientists to work on is why Adam Sandler has a career in film at all. He comes across as a deeply unfunny, whiny, petulant, crassly selfish man-child who despite being a vile human being needs everyone to love him.
It is enough to make you believe in vast Zionist Conspiracies or something. Either that or the film viewing public is too stupid to be allowed to vote. Possibly both.